I found this discussion on another board and I thought it was interesting so I wanted to bring it up here.

In 1989 Doug Collins shifted Michael Jordan to the PG position and it appeared to work. He started racking up triple doubles consistently, 10 in 11 games in fact, and that one missed game was a 40/11/7 performance. Stellar really. Pippen and his other teammates were scoring more and more involved in the offense as a result and all cylinders seemed to be clicking. However in late April teams adjusted to this new scheme and the Bulls went 4-8 and were eliminated by the Pistons in the playoffs.

While reading that article and recalling my knowledge of that season, the parallels to this new Lakers-style everyone is appraising seemed eerily similar. So obviously I began to worry that teams might adjust to "Kobe-Johnson" and the Lakers will be back to square one.

Of course my knowledge of the Bulls 1989 season isn't as thorough as some of the other members on here, so I wanted to hear everyone's thoughts. However, I personally feel as though this scenario is different for a couple of reasons. Here we have Kobe creating out of the post for the most part and running some deeper PnRs. Jordan didn't have as established of a post game in '89, and as a result it was easier to stop creation from the perimeter versus on the block. Also, Kobe has the advantage of having another facilitator off the ball in Steve Nash, as well as a good passer in Gasol and a low post threat in Howard. If teams collapse on Kobe he can make them pay with some good ball movement. These sets bring back some memories of the triangle actually, which the Bulls were not running that season.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how the better teams adjust to the Lakers new offense, especially on the road trip coming up. I feel as though the Lakers have a "pick your poison" type thing going for them, just based on what I saw in the OKC game, but their future success remains to be seen.

Defensively speaking, there's no teams today that compare to the 89 Pistons.

Don't know about that. Physically, no...but zone defense will always be tougher to play against than physical man. Nobody will ever, ever convince me otherwise, since I've had my ass handed to me before with teams playing zone.

Plus, most of the top greatest defensive teams (opponent FG% and defensive rating) have come post-Jordan...when zone defense was allowed.

Today, the Indiana Pacers are, statistically, one of the greatest defensive teams in league history. They are holding teams to UNDER 42% FG. That's scary good.

By the way...the stuff about teams adjusting...that isn't why Chicago started to struggle.

For one, Jordan never played the PG position. He just became a facilitator. That's one thing that always bothers me when it comes to basketball talk, haha. Facilitators can come out of any position.

Being a huge, HUGE Jordan fan back in the day, and because I started watching basketball in the late 80's and had a plethora of VHS tapes to fall back on when I was older (and actually understood the game better), it's easier for me to recall how things went down.

Sam Vincent fell to injury...missed maybe a game or two here and there, and started playing very, very little minutes injured. Long story short, Hodges replaced him in the lineup, and then HE was injured.

The huge run that Jordan and the Bulls went on...was with Hodges in the five, because he was one of the best three-point shooters in the game (like Nash is), and guess what? It all made sense to put the ball in MJ's hands, because it turned Hodges into a threat...a huge one, that was spreading the floor and giving Jordan room to operate.

In an eight-game stretch, Hodges was attempting 5-6 threes a night. In a six-game stretch, he shot 22-31 from downtown.

THAT is devastating to any team trying to defend Jordan, Pippen, Grant, and a guy that rains threes on you.

Once he was injured, and Vincent wasn't himself, Paxson stepped in. He wasn't that great of a three-point shooter until the last few seasons of his career, and in an eight-game stretch to finish the season, he shot just nine threes.

-------------

This is another reason why it's a great thing to put the ball in Kobe's hands, and have Nash (our best shooter, from anywhere on the court) spread the floor. I've been stressing this since the preseason. It's big. He can be a Hodges, but with the option to be a playmaker out of P&R situations, and that's incredibly tough to defend if you're THAT good of a shooter.

Fan Since:When Magic crossed over the entire Warriors team in like 88. Chis Gatling looked like he was gonna cry.

Fav. Laker:KB

Posted January 28, 2013 - 11:58 AM

Yea but Bill Lambier, Dennis Rodman, John Salley, Joe Dumars and Mark Aguirre would just put people on their asses. Theres no comparison. true a zone is harder to score against. I agree. But on the flip side hand checking can be called a foul. lol. Take the same 90's pistons player personnel and let them play a zone and teams would be lucky to shoot 30% cause theyd have elbows to the ribs and craniums every shot. Its just the difference in how the games played now. But that 90's Piston squad was awesome defensively.

Teams will definitely adjust to Kobe playing this way, I have no doubt about that. The number of easy shot opportunities we've been getting the last two games will drop once teams figure out schemes to deal with it. At that point we need to have other options available on the floor. Just forcing through Kobe in isolation on the block won't get it done without the necessary off-ball action, you need cutters and guys that will get themselves open on the perimeter. It'll take a healthy mix of posting up Dwight, playing through Kobe, and making use of Nash PnR with Kobe on the opposite side to get it done once teams figure out how to deal with it.

Don't know about that. Physically, no...but zone defense will always be tougher to play against than physical man. Nobody will ever, ever convince me otherwise, since I've had my ass handed to me before with teams playing zone.

Yes the zone is the toughest defense to go against!

Perfect example

I played 5 on 5 at the gym the other day with some friends, everyone on my team was 5"9 and below and on the other they were like 6'3-6'5 all 5 of them.

Long story short we used the zone the whole game and we ran em out the building. These guys were good ballers too.

I found this discussion on another board and I thought it was interesting so I wanted to bring it up here.

In 1989 Doug Collins shifted Michael Jordan to the PG position and it appeared to work. He started racking up triple doubles consistently, 10 in 11 games in fact, and that one missed game was a 40/11/7 performance. Stellar really. Pippen and his other teammates were scoring more and more involved in the offense as a result and all cylinders seemed to be clicking. However in late April teams adjusted to this new scheme and the Bulls went 4-8 and were eliminated by the Pistons in the playoffs.

While reading that article and recalling my knowledge of that season, the parallels to this new Lakers-style everyone is appraising seemed eerily similar. So obviously I began to worry that teams might adjust to "Kobe-Johnson" and the Lakers will be back to square one.

Of course my knowledge of the Bulls 1989 season isn't as thorough as some of the other members on here, so I wanted to hear everyone's thoughts. However, I personally feel as though this scenario is different for a couple of reasons. Here we have Kobe creating out of the post for the most part and running some deeper PnRs. Jordan didn't have as established of a post game in '89, and as a result it was easier to stop creation from the perimeter versus on the block. Also, Kobe has the advantage of having another facilitator off the ball in Steve Nash, as well as a good passer in Gasol and a low post threat in Howard. If teams collapse on Kobe he can make them pay with some good ball movement. These sets bring back some memories of the triangle actually, which the Bulls were not running that season.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how the better teams adjust to the Lakers new offense, especially on the road trip coming up. I feel as though the Lakers have a "pick your poison" type thing going for them, just based on what I saw in the OKC game, but their future success remains to be seen.

It is a heck of a lot easier to stop one on five than it is to stop an offense that moves the ball.....Keep up the good work Kobe, the new style is the way he needs to play the rest of his career.

To me, those Pistons teams had principles that are in modern day zones. All eyes on Jordan, guys were tied on a string leading Mj where they want him to go, and essentially that's what zones do to great players, or quasi-zones like Boston played against Kobe in 2008.

Yea but Bill Lambier, Dennis Rodman, John Salley, Joe Dumars and Mark Aguirre would just put people on their asses. Theres no comparison. true a zone is harder to score against. I agree. But on the flip side hand checking can be called a foul. lol. Take the same 90's pistons player personnel and let them play a zone and teams would be lucky to shoot 30% cause theyd have elbows to the ribs and craniums every shot. Its just the difference in how the games played now. But that 90's Piston squad was awesome defensively.

There's no doubt about that, but the fact remains that they couldn't play zone...and how would they have been without the hand-checking? We don't know.

How good would the 2013 Pacers team play defense if they had zone AND hand-checking? To me, there's really no point in speculating...you'd think they'd still be better than the 1989 Pistons, though.

There's a reason why dropping 120+ in a game was "just another day at the office" in the NBA decades ago. No coincidence that there were MANY more guards shooting 50% or better from the floor back then.

These days, if you're a guard and shooting 50%, you're bad ass...and if your team puts up 120-130, it's stellar.

To me, those Pistons teams had principles that are in modern day zones. All eyes on Jordan, guys were tied on a string leading Mj where they want him to go, and essentially that's what zones do to great players, or quasi-zones like Boston played against Kobe in 2008.

Of course, but unfortunately, they were required to leave a man open every single time they doubled MJ, and that's where Jordan made them pay. That's the major difference between defense then, and what it's like now.